Is there a realistic alternative to capitalism and communism?
For the last century these two systems have each claimed to be the only
alternative to the other. The fact that both are terrible has made fundamental
change seem hopeless.

But capitalism and communism are bad for a specific reason: they
are both forms of elite rule based on the same profoundly wrong ideas about
people. Both social systems view ordinary people as selfish and unfit to rule.
Both assume that the highest goal of society is to increase economic production.

With different ideas about people, a different kind of world is
possible.

FOUR PRINCIPLES FOR A NEW WORLD

ONE. In a good society the value of any policy would be measured
by its impact on human relations. The most important things that people
produce are not commodities, but human relations of love, solidarity, mutual
aid, and trust. These relations are what make security and happiness possible.
When economic production helps fulfill these human relations, it is positive.
But economic growth is by no means always beneficial and should not be the goal
of human society.

TWO. In a truly democratic society work would be
voluntary. The reward or punishment for contributing more or less than one's
fair share would be the better or worse quality of relations one has with others
as a result. Most people seek to give their lives meaning through work,
creativity, and acts that benefit others. People want to do the work that they
believe is required to enable themselves and others to live, prosper, and be
happy. When people are free to do this they don't need to be compelled. We see
this today in all sorts of volunteer work, as well as the countless things
people do for each other without even thinking of it as "work." Compulsion, in
the form of no pay for no work or more pay for more work, is only required when
people are not free and an elite is forcing ordinary people to work for them.

THREE. In a society based on solidarity and trust, the economics
of producing and distributing things would be like sharing within a family,
rather than buying and selling for profit in a marketplace. The wealth of
any society is the fruit of collective efforts. People are naturally inclined to
share goods and services according to need with those they trust. We see this
sharing today within families, despite the pressure from capitalism to make
competition and self-interest the dominant motivation everywhere. The circles of
trust within which people share according to need will greatly widen when
society is no longer ruled by elites who view human solidarity as a threat to
their power.

FOUR. Democracy consists of ordinary people with shared
fundamental values actually shaping all of society according to their values.
Democracy means that everywhere people live and work, they decide what their own
goals are and how they will cooperate to reach them. It means all concerned have
an equal say. It means people are free to assemble to discuss anything and
everything with full access to all information, and they are free to make and
carry out any decision no matter how revolutionary.

What would a society based on these
ideas look like? Probably it would look different in various places and change
over time as people experimented with different ways of doing things. Whatever
the details, it would be a world where people supported and trusted one another,
where people felt safe among strangers, where people didn't feel alone in
dealing with natural catastrophes, sickness or bad luck, where children were
optimistic about their futures, and where people found real meaning in what they
did all day.